Do you guys really want homophobes catering your weddings? I mean I do see the humor in making one do so. I'd get a kick out of it, but I think that most gay people would not even want those people to share one of the greatest moments in their life with them.

Wouldn't it be a better ideal to let these people be as openly homophobic as they want, that way you know to avoid helping those people by patronizing their business.

It would probably be a tough thing with gay marriage being new to get turned down by several vendors in a row, but once your straight friends hear which jerks treated you harshly and which businesses treated you like kings and queens (via huge exposure on facebook), then you can make a huge financial impact.

Money is a weapon, shame is a weapon, a trusted friend highly reccomend ing a vendor is a valuable weapon. It seems like you could meet your political aims better

Don't get me wrong, I know this goes way beyond just catering a wedding, but honestly that is where the most ignorance is going to come from. You're not recalling going to call a pest control person and have him refuse to tent your house, because you're gay, and clearly if a certain type of business makes it impossible to gain a service because the business owners in that field are disproportionately homophobic or have a little too much power, than laws need to be made to protect homosexuals, but for the most part, don't you want the bigots to be as open about their beliefs as possible. This is a wierd analogy, but it's comparable though not to the same degree. Making pedophiles comfortable enough to admit they're a pedophile to you, is the best way to spot these monsters and keep them away from your children. Does the same type of logic not apply here?

To homophobic Christians; Sorry if I offended you. I'm talking to people who are hurt by your belief system. I know you guys are not monsters, and I certainly understand a decision to not condone or support an action you find unethical, though I'm confused at why this issue is of such importance.

Don't get me wrong, I know this goes way beyond just catering a wedding, but honestly that is where the most ignorance is going to come from. You're not recalling going to call a pest control person and have him refuse to tent your house, because you're gay, and clearly if a certain type of business makes it impossible to gain a service because the business owners in that field are disproportionately homophobic or have a little too much power, than laws need to be made to protect homosexuals, but for the most part, don't you want the bigots to be as open about their beliefs as possible. This is a wierd analogy, but it's comparable though not to the same degree. Making pedophiles comfortable enough to admit they're a pedophile to you, is the best way to spot these monsters and keep them away from your children. Does the same type of logic not apply here?

To homophobic Christians; Sorry if I offended you. I'm talking to people who are hurt by your belief system. I know you guys are not monsters, and I certainly understand a decision to not condone or support an action you find unethical, though I'm confused at why this issue is of such importance.

Yea, the problem is not just this one issue, it is about passing laws that protect discrimination.

Don't get me wrong, I know this goes way beyond just catering a wedding, but honestly that is where the most ignorance is going to come from. You're not recalling going to call a pest control person and have him refuse to tent your house, because you're gay, and clearly if a certain type of business makes it impossible to gain a service because the business owners in that field are disproportionately homophobic or have a little too much power, than laws need to be made to protect homosexuals, but for the most part, don't you want the bigots to be as open about their beliefs as possible. This is a wierd analogy, but it's comparable though not to the same degree. Making pedophiles comfortable enough to admit they're a pedophile to you, is the best way to spot these monsters and keep them away from your children. Does the same type of logic not apply here?

To homophobic Christians; Sorry if I offended you. I'm talking to people who are hurt by your belief system. I know you guys are not monsters, and I certainly understand a decision to not condone or support an action you find unethical, though I'm confused at why this issue is of such importance.

Yea, the problem is not just this one issue, it is about passing laws that protect discrimination.

That's the problem they are protecting discrimination. your absolutely right.

It's exactly like you said in your intro, Wylt, I'm not satisfied with simply improving businesses by lowering patronage; the bad companies should be humiliated firts. A wise man once said: "It's not enough that I must win, my adversaries must lose."

At 4/16/2015 11:05:12 AM, SirCrona wrote:It's exactly like you said in your intro, Wylt, I'm not satisfied with simply improving businesses by lowering patronage; the bad companies should be humiliated firts. A wise man once said: "It's not enough that I must win, my adversaries must lose."

I'm starting to learn that having adversaries is bad. It's better just to partner with people for mutual gain, even people you hate.

What if a gay baker wanted to work at an establishment, but the employer refused to hire him simply because he was gay?

These laws also extend to the employee-employer interaction, which I think is the important part. I don't think it's a big deal if you don't cater to a gay wedding, but if you only hire straight people or only hire white people, it's a bigger problem.

At 4/16/2015 11:27:25 AM, Praesentya wrote:What if a gay baker wanted to work at an establishment, but the employer refused to hire him simply because he was gay?

I'm really extremist in my political leanings. I'm as Libertarian as you can get without being an anarchist, so I do think that should be legal (not that it's okay). However, I also think that is different that picking clientele.

These laws also extend to the employee-employer interaction, which I think is the important part. I don't think it's a big deal if you don't cater to a gay wedding, but if you only hire straight people or only hire white people, it's a bigger problem.

In this society, yes those laws are probably needed. I think laws like that are unethical but it may be the lesser of 2 evils

I'm really extremist in my political leanings. I'm as Libertarian as you can get without being an anarchist, so I do think that should be legal (not that it's okay). However, I also think that is different that picking clientele.

In this society, yes those laws are probably needed. I think laws like that are unethical but it may be the lesser of 2 evils

I respect where you're coming from, even though I don't agree. Generally, I think you and I would on the same page - government shouldn't intervene with business practice. However I don't regard 'not being discriminatory' as such a monumental inconvenience that it will hurt business. Nobody is saying "you have to hire gay people," we're just saying you can't fire them for being gay. Again, I don't think that interjection into the private sector will have devastating ramifications.

I agree with you that if someone refuses to provide their business to you for any reason, you should just take it somewhere else - no real need for a law there... Businesses will be exposed, humiliated, etc. However, I've seen how devastating discriminatory hiring practices can be, and I feel as though requiring businesses to not discriminate shouldn't obstruct their economic goals.

The gays and govt have made it clear. If I don't accept homosexuality and cater to it they will destroy me financially and threaten me and my family with death. Seems pretty straightforward to me. We live in a facist sht hole ruled by socialist fascist nazi like thugs.

It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%

At 4/16/2015 8:18:34 AM, Wylted wrote:Do you guys really want homophobes catering your weddings? I mean I do see the humor in making one do so. I'd get a kick out of it, but I think that most gay people would not even want those people to share one of the greatest moments in their life with them.

Wouldn't it be a better ideal to let these people be as openly homophobic as they want, that way you know to avoid helping those people by patronizing their business.

It would probably be a tough thing with gay marriage being new to get turned down by several vendors in a row, but once your straight friends hear which jerks treated you harshly and which businesses treated you like kings and queens (via huge exposure on facebook), then you can make a huge financial impact.

Money is a weapon, shame is a weapon, a trusted friend highly reccomend ing a vendor is a valuable weapon. It seems like you could meet your political aims better

Don't get me wrong, I know this goes way beyond just catering a wedding, but honestly that is where the most ignorance is going to come from. You're not recalling going to call a pest control person and have him refuse to tent your house, because you're gay, and clearly if a certain type of business makes it impossible to gain a service because the business owners in that field are disproportionately homophobic or have a little too much power, than laws need to be made to protect homosexuals, but for the most part, don't you want the bigots to be as open about their beliefs as possible. This is a wierd analogy, but it's comparable though not to the same degree. Making pedophiles comfortable enough to admit they're a pedophile to you, is the best way to spot these monsters and keep them away from your children. Does the same type of logic not apply here?

To homophobic Christians; Sorry if I offended you. I'm talking to people who are hurt by your belief system. I know you guys are not monsters, and I certainly understand a decision to not condone or support an action you find unethical, though I'm confused at why this issue is of such importance.

Nice in theory, but there are countless examples in history where an opressed minority has next to zero economic clout to enable a societal change on a major scale. Not that LGBT issues and those that support them dont currently have any economic clout, but there are surely pockets in america where there would be no shame discriminating against gays.

Lastly those who would refuse to seve gays because of their sexual orientation are monsters and will be treated as such when they met their maker.

This isn't about gay marriage at all. Militant gays, AKA the gay mafia, have one goal in mind. The elimination of marriage. It's part of their war on christianity. Plain and simple.

Most Christians have no problem serving gays. The problem is when they want them to participate in events that they find objectionable. Like catering a gay event. It would be comparable to a Jew being forced to cater a Clan rally.

At 4/17/2015 11:45:31 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:So, St. Judes or Florida Hospital (religiously oriented private hospital in my state) or an Ambulance service etc etc begins to adopt the same policy of not serving gays.

Now what?

As I said, exceptions need to be made, because we don't live in a completely capitalist society. It would be ideal to do so, but because it is not possible, obviously certain services would have to be excluded, such as the one you mention. Also if a business has too much control over a certain industry or if an industry is basically made up entirely of homophobes, something would have to be done.

At 4/16/2015 11:27:25 AM, Praesentya wrote:What if a gay baker wanted to work at an establishment, but the employer refused to hire him simply because he was gay?

I'm really extremist in my political leanings. I'm as Libertarian as you can get without being an anarchist, so I do think that should be legal (not that it's okay). However, I also think that is different that picking clientele.

Extremism is rarely, if ever, a good position.

These laws also extend to the employee-employer interaction, which I think is the important part. I don't think it's a big deal if you don't cater to a gay wedding, but if you only hire straight people or only hire white people, it's a bigger problem.

In this society, yes those laws are probably needed. I think laws like that are unethical but it may be the lesser of 2 evils

Idealism doesn't mean much when reality comes into play. The lesser of 2 evils is usually best when trying to what is best for society.

This isn't about gay marriage at all. Militant gays, AKA the gay mafia, have one goal in mind. The elimination of marriage. It's part of their war on christianity. Plain and simple.

You watch too much fox news. Marriage is not a Christian institution. In case you have not noticed it is possible to get married regardless of ones religion. It is clearly time to seperate religious marriage cerimony from the civil contract the state enfoces called marriage because people are not able to differentiate the two.